you did say "hi dr" a couple of posts above )
As far as I know they don't do retail because it's not at all mainstream. So the only quote I got is around 150£ pe kilo minimum 50 kilos .1mm thickness FeCo. This amnounts to a lot, so I'm curios if they send free samples
I've looked at Emetor and it seems quite appreciated. They advertised some companies working with this soft, I know some use other things also, but for 9€/sim it's a dam cheap way to do a non-linear FEA sim. The entry cost for FEA software is 5-figure minimum per user per rig, if we don't count FEMM.
Still, I don't know what they put in the iron loss computation. For me, even paid software is more or less bad when predicting iron losses becasue it's rarely anything but pseudo-analytical per mesh unit computation based on data obtained with sinus wave-form. I think the error margin is 50-100% easily depending on the degree of non-linearity, so finding a certain design is 10% better iron loss wise may not mean much. I only trust induction maps at iso-frequency because I never had to ask myself how many pole pairs I had to use (always chose the max to reduce weight while limited by the electronics' switching speed). I've read your thread and wish you good luck, I'd like to see a manufacturer in Europe doing something nice; achieving 0.6 filling ratio is worth seing, it is apparently pretty much the most one can hope. BTW, have you thought of bars in stead of wires? You could get away with slimmer slots, thus wider teeth, lower induction per tooth and lower losses (or just lower weight for same losses).
As far as I know they don't do retail because it's not at all mainstream. So the only quote I got is around 150£ pe kilo minimum 50 kilos .1mm thickness FeCo. This amnounts to a lot, so I'm curios if they send free samples
I've looked at Emetor and it seems quite appreciated. They advertised some companies working with this soft, I know some use other things also, but for 9€/sim it's a dam cheap way to do a non-linear FEA sim. The entry cost for FEA software is 5-figure minimum per user per rig, if we don't count FEMM.
Still, I don't know what they put in the iron loss computation. For me, even paid software is more or less bad when predicting iron losses becasue it's rarely anything but pseudo-analytical per mesh unit computation based on data obtained with sinus wave-form. I think the error margin is 50-100% easily depending on the degree of non-linearity, so finding a certain design is 10% better iron loss wise may not mean much. I only trust induction maps at iso-frequency because I never had to ask myself how many pole pairs I had to use (always chose the max to reduce weight while limited by the electronics' switching speed). I've read your thread and wish you good luck, I'd like to see a manufacturer in Europe doing something nice; achieving 0.6 filling ratio is worth seing, it is apparently pretty much the most one can hope. BTW, have you thought of bars in stead of wires? You could get away with slimmer slots, thus wider teeth, lower induction per tooth and lower losses (or just lower weight for same losses).